Recent Articles

Lessons of the Iraqi De-Ba'athification Program for Iraq's Future and the Arab Revolutions Dr W Andrew Terrill Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "The presence of U.S. combat troops in Iraq has now come to an end, and the lessons of that conflict for the United States and other nations will be debated for some time to come. It is now widely understood that the post-invasion policy of de-Ba’athification, as practiced, had numerous unintended consequences that made building Iraqi civil society especially difficult following the U.S.-led invasion. The U.S. approach to this policy is often assessed as having underestimated both the dangers of increased sectarianism in Iraq and the need for strong efforts to manage ethnic-sectarian divisions. The Iraqi government’s approach to de-Ba’athification was, nevertheless, much more problematic due to its openly biased and sectarian nature. However well-intentioned, de-Ba’athification originally was as a concept, in practice it had a number of serious problems. These problems intensified and became more alarming as the de-Ba’athification process became increasingly dominated by the Iraqis and American oversight over that program gradually evaporated. At that time, it came to be viewed as an instrument of revenge and collective punishment by both the Iraqis that administered de-Ba’athification and those that were targeted by these policies. "

The Role of Small States in the Post-Cold War Era: The Case of Belarus Dr Dmitry Shlapentokh Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "The following conclusions are drawn from this analysis: 1. There is an emerging post-unipolar world. Now the United States is not the only global center, as it was during the first years of the post-Cold War era. Nor do just two superpowers—the United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics—now define the course of global events. The new multipolarity implies the presence of several centers of power. This provides the opportunity for small states such as Belarus to move from one center of power to another or to engage in a sort of geopolitical gamesmanship. 2. During the last 10 years or so, Belarus moved from Russia to the European Union (EU) and back. At the same time, it engaged in relationships with Iran and China. While relationships with Russia and the EU have not been stable, this is not the case with China and Iran. Here, Belarus has always maintained a good relationship, especially in the case of China. This is demonstrated by the increasing role of Asia in the geopolitical arrangements of the present, and will be even more so in the future."

Ambassador Stephen Krasner's Orienting Principle for Foreign Policy (and Military Management)—Responsible Sovereignty Dr Max G Manwaring Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "The principal security threats of the past several centuries—war between or among major powers—do not have the urgency they once did. Two new types of threats have been introduced into the global security arena. Violent nonstate actors and other indirect political, economic, and social causes of poverty, social exclusion, corruption, terrorism, transnational crime, the global drug problem, and gangs are a few examples of “new” threats to global security and stability. Today, even more so than in the past, the evolving concept of national security implies the protection—provided through a variety of nonmilitary and military ways and means—of the popular interests that provide for the well-being of society. This broadened definition of the contemporary security problem makes the concept so vague as to render it useless as an analytical tool. The genius of Ambassador Stephen Krasner, however, helps solve the problem."

Enabling Unity of Effort in Homeland Response Operations LTG H Steven Blum, LTC Kerry McIntyre Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "Balancing authorities and responsibilities within our federal system has been a matter of continuous debate since the earliest days of the republic. Its continued relevance is exemplified in our current national conversation over how to most effectively organize and operate for homeland security and defense. Crises and catastrophic events in our homeland require Americans from different organizations, jurisdictions, and functions to work together. Yet despite considerable national effort and resources devoted to developing and improving our collective response capabilities, effectiveness in working together—unity of effort—still seems to elude us."

Peace & Stability Journal, Volume 2, Issue 3 Mister Robert C Browne Peace and Stability Journal by the US Army War College, Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Institute "The Joint Staff J7 teamed with the Peace Operations Policy Program at George Mason University (GMU), the Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Institute (PKSOI), and other stakeholders to conduct a unified workshop at George Mason University, Arlington Campus, from 7-9 February 2012. The workshop provided a forum for trainers, educators, planners and practitioners from the U.S., international governmental and military organizations, international non-governmental organizations, military and civilian peace and stability training centers and academic institutions to share current challenges and best practices toward improving civilian and military teaming efforts, promoting synergy, and reducing ad hoc efforts that address interrelated challenges."

Collins Center Update, Volume 14, Issue 2 (Spring 2012) Colonel Rick Schwartz, Professor B.F. Griffard, Profs Alan G. Bourque, Eugene L. Thompson, Professor John (Jef) Troxell Collins Center Update by the US Army War College, Center for Strategic Leadership

In Support of the Common Defense Journal - Volume 1 Bert B. Tussing, Kurt Crytzer, Steve Carney Study by the US Army War College, Center for Strategic Leadership "An unspoken standard of the Armed Forces has always been, “When the nation is least ready, we must be most ready.” While that rings clear as far as warfare is concerned, it is not nearly so when it comes to the realm of domestic security. In spite of strategies that continue to espouse homeland security and homeland defense as “job one,” woefully few in the Department of Defense have studied the issues, the intricacies, and the nuances that necessarily surround the use of the military in the domestic environment. "

Security Sector Reform in Timor-Leste: Missed Opportunities and Hard Lessons in Empowering the Host-Nation Mr Nicholas J Armstrong, Ms Jacqueline Chura-Beaver, Isaac Kfir PKSOI Paper US Army War College, Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Institute "The authors explore the dichotomy for host-nation ownership with the role of foreign assistance in security sector reform. They conclude that this balance is a critical variable that will determine success or failure regardless of the starting condition. Their conclusion serves to highlight the importance of the present U.S. defense strategic guidance, with its emphasis on the promotion of security, prosperity, and human dignity through capacity building engagements."

Conflict Management and "Whole of Government": Useful Tools for U.S. National Security Strategy? Dr Robert H Dorff, Dr Volker C Franke Book by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute, Kennesaw State University, and KSU's International Conflict Management Throughout most of the 20th century, national security focused primarily, and sometimes exclusively, on military affairs. In the 21st century, this has changed as new and more comprehensive ways of thinking about, studying, and planning for national security and global security are being adopted in response to new security challenges and threats that go beyond the dangers posed by traditional causes of war and conflict. In addition to terrorism, these other threats to security are posed by, but not limited to, shortfalls of energy and nonfuel mineral resources, scarcity of food and fresh water, encroaching desertification, and cyber attacks. To some, these new challenges and threats present as much, and over time perhaps more, of a challenge and threat to security as do guns, bombs, and missiles.